BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC REPORT
Report to:
CABINET
Report of:
CHIEF LEGAL OFFICER
Date of Meeting:
24 APRIL 2006
Relevant Forward Plan Ref:
N/A
Subject:
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - THE
FIRST TWELVE MONTHS & A CODE OF
PRACTICE
Relevant Cabinet Member:
Councillor Mike Whitby - Leader of the Council
Relevant O&S Chairman:
Councillor Michael Wilkes
Wards affected:
All
1.
Purpose of report:
1.1
To update Cabinet on the implementation, in the first twelve months, of the
Freedom of Information Act that came into force on 1st January 2005; and .
1.2
To seek approval to the Code of Practice for re-use of public sector information
2. Decision(s)
recommended:
(Use an Appendix, if these exceed 1/3 of a page)
2.1
To note the report; and
2.2
To approve the attached Code of Practice and to authorise the Chief Legal Officer
to keep it up to date,
Contact Officer:
Mirza Ahmad
Chief Legal Officer
Telephone no/e-mail address:
303 9991
[email address]
Signatures:
Chief Officer:
……………………………………………………………………….
Cabinet Member:
………………………………………………………………………
List of background documents: Corporate Policy on FOIA and related database information (save for confidential / exempt
information).
0327-FOIUpdate.doc
Page No 1
3.
Brief Summary of Report:
This report details the impact of the Freedom of Information Act in terms of:
number of requests received from January – December 2005;
number and type of requestors;
performance of the City Council in responding to requests
4.
Compliance Issues:
4.1
Are Decisions consistent with relevant Council Policies, Plans or Strategies:
The report reflects the City Council’s management of requests for information under
the Freedom of Information Act. The Act aims to support more open and
transparent local decision-making. The City Council’s policy document, which is
available on the website – has been reviewed and amended accordingly over the
course on the year to reflect emerging best practice and guidance. This includes
guidance on seeking clarification, use of exemptions, fees regulations, dealing with
the media and establishing appeals panels.
4.2
Relevant Officers/Members/ others consulted on this matter:
The Leader has been consulted over the drafting of this report.
4.3
Relevant legal powers, including Financial, Personnel, Equalities and other
resource implications (if any):
(a)
The Department of Constitutional Affairs (DCA) published the Fees Regulations
which entitled Public Authorities to make charges in relation to complying with a
request made under the Act. There is a limit of £450, below which Local Authorities
are not entitled to charge the applicant. In order to work to the £450 limit, an hourly
rate of £25 per person per hour should be used. This equates to 18 hours of work.
The £450 limit does not cover disbursement or postage charges (see below), which
the Public Authority can still charge the applicant. The DCA has indicated that it
may review the Fees Regulations in light of the experience of FOIA in the first year.
Cabinet will be advised of any changes as necessary.
(b)
The work entailed in dealing with the request to which the fees apply is: determining
whether the information is held; locating and retrieving the information and/or
striking any exempt information from the document containing the information. The
Government has not made any resources available to local government to deal with
Freedom of Information Act requests and, as such, all resources spent have been
from Council resources. The total annual cost to the Council, in relation to the
Corporate FOIA Team is about £ 117,000. This figure does not include the officer
time spent in each of the Directorates to deal with FOIA requirements. The
Departmental time/cost is being calculated.
4.4
Main Risk Management and Equality Impact Assessment Issues (if any):
The City has a duty to provide advice and assistance and in validating a request. The
provision of advice and assistance also takes into account the City Council’s commitment
to its Customer Charter, the Corporate Equality Scheme and obligations under legislation
such as the Race Relations Amendments Act and the Disability Discrimination Act.
0327-FOIUpdate.doc
Page No 2
5.
Relevant background/chronology of key events:
5.1
The Freedom of Information Act was introduced in 2000. The Act gives two general
rights in relation to the disclosure of information which came into force on 1st
January 2005:
The right to be told, subject to relevant exemptions, if the information is held;
The right to be given, subject to relevant exemptions, that information within 20
working days.
5.2 The Act also requires that public bodies produce and maintain a Publication
Scheme. The City Council produced its first Publication Scheme as one of the pilot
authorities in February 2003. The current version was prepared in February 2005
and is on the website.
5.3
An analysis of the FOIA requests submitted during January to December 2005 is
attached at
Appendix 1 of this Report. It shows that requests appear to be
stabilising around 30-40 requests per month. The Development Directorate has
revised the greatest number of requests, followed by the Local Services Directorate
and the Chief Executives Department.
5.4 Requests for information are required to be dealt with within 20 working days
however, public bodies have the legal right to extend the working days in certain
circumstances, such as consideration of a public interest test exemption or where
the City Council has sought to consult with third parties where the information
requested relates to them.
5.5
Over the first 12 months, only 50 requests have not met the statutory deadlines.
Out of a total of 647 for 12 months, this equates to a default of 7.72%. This
includes 9 late responses in August : 5 from Social Care and Health, which related
to one applicant which were eventually refused under Section 40 exemption and 9
late responses in December (4 from Housing where notification of extension of the
working days for public interest consideration was done outside of the 20 working
day limit).
5.6
During the first 12 months period, the City Council has received a small number of
complaints with regard to FOIA. We have handled 9 internal appeals so far and
dealt with three complaints referred by applicants to the Information Commissioner.
The Information Commissioner has also issued the City Council with a Decision
Notice (in January 2005) related to a failure to comply with a request within the 20
working days.
5.7
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister also concluded (in September 2005) the
first of 2 surveys to obtain evidence on how the introductions of the FOI Act and the
changes to the Environmental Information Regulations were being implemented in
local government. The first survey, in which the City Council took part, sought to
assess number of requests between 31st May 2005 and 23rd August 2005. The
second survey - originally scheduled for November 2005 and January 2006 - was
not issued by ODPM.
0327-FOIUpdate.doc
Page No 3
6.
New Code of Practice
6.1
This Report also takes the opportunity for Cabinet to approve the Draft Code of
Practice for the “Re-use of Public Sector Information” (
Appendix 2). This has
been introduced to reflect changes in law, brought into effect during the summer of
2005, and is recommended to Cabinet as a model of good practice. It is also
recommended that I be authorized to keep it up to date. A copy of the Code will be
placed on the website.
6.2
The Code of Practice will support the City Council in managing requests for re-use
under these Regulations. It links closely with existing agreed policies to manage
requests for information under Freedom of Information legislation.
6.3
A public sector body
may permit re-use but they are not under an automatic
obligation to allow the “re-use” of any document they hold. However, where a
public sector body permits re-use, it shall do so in accordance with the Regulations.
Where a public sector body has allowed the re-use of information to one
organisation, it must treat all requests for re-use of the same information by other
organisations for similar purposes, on the same terms, i.e. the terms of the licence
should be the same. Likewise, exclusive licence agreements should also be
avoided, unless it is necessary for the provision of a public service.
6.4
A request for re-use must first satisfy the criteria for access under relevant
legislation – such as Freedom of Information (FOI). Information exempt under FOI
cannot be provided for re-use, so all requests for re-use must first be considered in
accordance with existing policy on access to information. This will incorporate
guidance on the provision of advice and assistance supporting applicant making, or
wishing to make, requests for information.
6.5
The re-use Regulations do not carry the same obligations as FOI. However, where
Birmingham City Council is the copyright holder of the information it should set out
its baseline for re-use. It is recommended that re-use for personal, educational or
non-commercial purposes is permitted without further reference to the City Council.
This will support the requirements of the Regulations and ensure applications to re-
use will be dealt with in a timely, open and transparent manner and the process will
be fair, consistent and non-discriminatory.
6.6
This is a relatively new area for the City Council and policy will need to be
developed in accordance with emerging practice and guidance. The organisations
covered by the Regulations include Central Government Departments (including
Parliament), Local Government, Police, Fire and Health Services. The coverage
does not extend to schools, universities or other educational establishments.
Cultural organisations such as libraries and museums and public sector
broadcasters, such as the BBC, are also excluded. However, information about
these organisations, held by public sector bodies is included.
6.7
Public bodies can choose the extent to which something is put into place to support
re-use of public sector information. The proposed Code of Practice enables the
City Council to process any requests for re-use and set a baseline for re-use
conditions.
0327-FOIUpdate.doc
Page No 4
